Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, November 21, 2020

Dan Balz: It has been almost three weeks since President Trump stepped to a lectern in the White House in the early hours of Nov. 4 to declare that the election was being stolen from him. Judging by his actions, Trump appears to have a motive other than overturning the election. He is determined to cripple Biden's presidency even before it becomes official. No defeated president has ever undertaken such an audacious and anti-democratic act.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Still, some analysts see the greatest threat to Biden's presidency as the likelihood of a four-year effort to undermine the new administration, led by a vindictive Trump. He has always looked for scapegoats when things don't go his way, and in this, the greatest setback of his life, he has manufactured the perfect excuse: He was robbed.

"I'm afraid that as ex-president, Trump is going to keep up a steady drumbeat ... to try to drive home one point: that the election was stolen from him, that Joe Biden is an illegitimate president and that this can only be resolved by Biden's removal from office through an election and his replacement by Donald J. Trump," said William Galston of the Brookings Institution.

This assault on the system, the government, the integrity of elections, the institutions of democracy, and on the truth, means Biden will take the oath of office with perhaps a third or more of the electorate viewing him as illegitimate. No amount of wooing will bring them around however genuine Biden is in his outreach.

The argument of whether or not the upcoming DOJ should focus on investigating and potentially charging Trump and his cohorts with crimes stemming from their reign of error is actually becoming one that cannot simply be ignored or backburnered as Trump's travesty of denial and retribution continues to roll on.

I am quickly becoming of the mindset that it will be imperative Trump be investigated for his ongoing and continuous conspiracy against the United States itself as he actively and with intent violated his oath to the Constitution in ways that weaken this nation not unlike a foreign nation's attempt at espionage to inflame Americans against Americans through the spread of false accusations and persecutions towards his political opponents.

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-21 05:09 PM | Reply

This article is moot if SDNY can just throw that fat orange stain in prison.

Also. Biden needs to stop trying to reason with Trump.

He needs to tell Trump to get out of the way or the DOJ will make sure he's ends up in prison and his family is left penniless.

#2 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-21 05:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

No modern presidential candidate has refused to concede. Here's why that matters.
www.nationalgeographic.com

...

Even though Joe Biden has secured enough votes to become president-elect of the United States, President Donald Trump has given every indication that he won't accept the result as fair. Trump also has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power.

Both moves would be historical firsts if Trump refuses to concede even after all legal challenges are resolved. U.S. history has seen a handful of bitterly contested elections, most recently in 2000, when Democrat Al Gore called Republican George W. Bush to concede in the early hours after election night"only to call back back and retract his concession when the race unexpectedly tightened up. While their first conversation was congenial, the second was tense, with Gore famously telling Bush, "You don't have to get snippy about this."

No presidential candidate has ever refused to concede defeat once all the votes were counted and legal challenges resolved.

For the country's first hundred years or so, conceding a race wasn't part of the process at all. Here's how the loser's concession went from nonexistent to an essential custom that all candidates have observed"albeit some less graciously than others.

How concessions became an election tradition...


#3 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-11-21 08:06 PM | Reply

TONY

I've been wondering myself if Biden's DOJ could use a blanket charge of Sedition to indict them all en masse. And is the term relative or subjective?

#4 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-22 05:16 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#4

Sedition needs to be researched. I cannot believe what vile traitors these people are.

The whole family.

I mean if the Rosenbergs were executed for what they did, how is what the Trumps have done anything less seditious than that?

#5 | Posted by bocaink at 2020-11-22 09:02 AM | Reply

BOCAINK

Sedition seems to be covered in the constitution as:

"Communication or agreement which has as its objective the stirring up of treason or certain lesser communications, or the defamation of the government. Sedition is advocating, or with knowledge of its contents knowingly publishing, selling or distributing any document which advocates, or, with knowledge of its purpose, knowingly become a member of any organization which advocates the overthrow or reformation of the existing form of government by violence or unlawful means. In insurrectionary movement tending toward treason, but wanting an overt act; attempts made by meetings or speeches, or by publications, to disturb the tranquility of the state." 18 U.S.C.A. Statute 2383.

Take it for what its worth. It sounds to me like Sedition is a precursor to treason that the Constitution nips in the bud.

#6 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-22 10:07 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#6

That's interesting.

Personally, I think Trump has a plane on standby, waiting to take him to Turkey or Russia or some other country where he thinks he could evade the law. Fact.

#7 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-22 10:18 AM | Reply

"I mean if the Rosenbergs were executed for what they did, how is what the Trumps have done anything less seditious than that?"

The Rosenbergs were filthy communists who gave nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union, this violating their non-disclosure agreement with the government. Trump has not done that, and as the highest classification authority in the country, he can give away whatever classified info he chooses, with the exception of the RD classification owned by the DoE. Even presidents can't declassify that of their own accord.

#8 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-22 10:20 AM | Reply

#8

You honestly think Russia doesn't know everything Trump knows? Admittedly it would be harder to prove but we have a few lengthy bipartisan reports that have a ton of smoke.

The Soviets gave mixed responses about how useful the Rosenbergs really were, although I would assume significant. I'm referring more towards #6 though, Trump has done all of this... every single word of 18 U.S.C.A Statute 2383.

That's got to be worse, or if anything, on par with the Rosenbergs have done.

#9 | Posted by bocaink at 2020-11-22 10:25 AM | Reply

To discover our secrets, all russia has to do is follow huffmyshorts etal. They insist on baring all our military secrets.
Seditious bstads.

#10 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2020-11-22 10:59 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

BOCAINK

The Rosenbergs were traitors. Trump is just a Seditionist ~~ for the moment anyway. It's still a serious crime. But, by Sedition standards, so is the RNC and quite a few members of the Senate who are not committing overate acts but who are supportive, providing (as described in the Constitution) that they're aware of the end game they support.

You'll never get anyone to admit that. They'll run for the nearest rabbit hole.

I'm certain Mitch McConnell knows the meaning of Sedition.

#11 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-22 11:03 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#10 | Posted by phesterOBoyle

HuffPo has access to military secrets???

LOL!

#12 | Posted by Angrydad at 2020-11-22 01:25 PM | Reply

#11

I get what you are saying, but the speeches, the violent innuendo, and the misinformation fits sedition and is overall a more destabilizing crime than the Rosenbergs. Had the Soviets fired a weapon, I would disagree with that.

#13 | Posted by bocaink at 2020-11-22 01:50 PM | Reply

I don't disagree with you at all. Sedition and Treason are nearly identical.

Except for one thing. The word "treason" is legally reserved for an act during a declaration of war by Congress or the War Powers Resolution enacted by the president.

I think a smart attorney could make a case that the RNC is at war with the United State which is being fought by means of Sedition vis-a-vie the President of the United States. That by itself is certainly becoming more clear every day.

I don't mean to split hairs but the word "Treason" is bandied about incorrectly ~ not on purpose but rather as a normal emotional response. I don't blame people for using it. I'd love to do it myself simply because the shoe fits. But it's not a term that would hold up in court ~~ at least not yet.

However, that could change on a dime if Trump attacks Iran under false pretenses. Then we could all scream "TRAITOR" for abuse of the military.

#14 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-22 03:39 PM | Reply

#6 | Posted by Twinpac

I don't know where you got that quote but sedition is set forth at 18 USC 2384:

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
www.law.cornell.edu

Here's FindLaw's explainer. criminal.findlaw.com

It takes much more than diarrhea of mouth at which the Buffoon excels.

#15 | Posted by et_al at 2020-11-22 06:06 PM | Reply

#14

Agreed, which is why I don't say Treason, but comparatively speaking I still think what Trump is doing is worse

#15
Let's see what happens, I mean in theory didn't Charles Manson have "diarrhea of the mouth?"

I'm going by the Manson principle and the "Fire" in a theatre principle.

And considering the diarrhea is aimed directly at the foundation of U.S. Governance, I don't know how much more seditious you could get.

The "Prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States" is the key language in my view.

I'm not a lawyer though.

#16 | Posted by bocaink at 2020-11-22 06:20 PM | Reply

#16

As the explainer notes words alone raise First Amendment concerns. The statute requires action by "... two or more persons ... by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States ... ."

#17 | Posted by et_al at 2020-11-22 06:56 PM | Reply

BOCAINK

"Prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States"

That probably isn't the key language you should rely on for Sedition. For example, people do that every day when they run out on their bail bond and they don't get charged with Sedition.

Sedition has everything to do with an act to overthrow the government. The RNC isn't even trying to be coy about it. I hope everybody remembers this when they try again in 2024.

#18 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-22 07:06 PM | Reply

ET AL

"I don't know where you got that quote but sedition is set forth at 18 USC 2384"

FYI ~ There's more than one part to 18 U.S.C.A ~ Sedition

#19 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-22 09:03 PM | Reply

Sedition
My favorite song on Fiddler on the Roof
Tradition?
Oh, nevermind

Emily Latella

#20 | Posted by bruceaz at 2020-11-22 09:18 PM | Reply

#19

Yep. Here are all of them. www.law.cornell.edu

None of the sections state what you quoted at #6 particularly not section 2383 which you specifically cite.

#21 | Posted by et_al at 2020-11-22 09:55 PM | Reply

ET AL

You can stop tilting at windmills. I've read them all and they all say basically the same thing. Although your link was somewhat truncated.

#22 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-22 10:32 PM | Reply

Twinpac, et_al,

I think both of you should check out Chapter 19 - Conspiracy and Chapter 29 - Elections and Political Activities:

[19] 371. Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

372. Conspiracy to impede or injure officer

If two or more persons in any State, Territory, Possession, or District conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof, or to induce by like means any officer of the United States to leave the place, where his duties as an officer are required to be performed, or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties, each of such persons shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six years, or both.

[29] 595. Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments

Whoever, being a person employed in any administrative position by the United States, or by any department or agency thereof, or by the District of Columbia or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or by any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States, or any political subdivision, municipality, or agency thereof, or agency of such political subdivision or municipality (including any corporation owned or controlled by any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States or by any such political subdivision, municipality, or agency), in connection with any activity which is financed in whole or in part by loans or grants made by the United States, or any department or agency thereof, uses his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

www.govinfo.gov

Comments?

#23 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-22 11:17 PM | Reply

TONY

Yes, your 371 and 371 deals with conspiracy. Conspiracy falls under a different statute than commission of Sedition itself.

Your 595 addressed neither.

I get my reference material from the local university library. I assume the verbiage is more courtroom friendly. But there is no ambiguity in the interpretation from one source to another. They all basically say the same thing.

#24 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-23 12:02 AM | Reply

TONY

I meant to type 371 and 372.

#25 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-23 12:04 AM | Reply

You can stop tilting at windmills.

You're usually not this hard headed. It's not "tilting at windmills" to accurately point out law. It appears to me the definition you quote at #6 (without attribution) is accurate in a broad general sense. That is not US law. That definition is the antithesis of modern First Amendment jurisprudence. Political speech is the "zenith" and that includes any and all "p**s, moan, groan or kill all the bas***ds" speech by anyone, including the Buffoon. US law criminalizing "sedition" is codified at 18 USC section 2384, linked at #15. It requires a conspiracy it requires force. Your hardheadedness notwithstanding.

#26 | Posted by et_al at 2020-11-23 02:19 AM | Reply

#23

Gut reaction.

371. Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

That's so broad it's useless. Quick run through US Attorney's Manual suggests it's probably limited to defrauding the government of money or property.

372. Conspiracy to impede or injure officer

"Conspiracy," a term of art, is a concern then there's the "force, intimidation, or threat" language.

595. Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments

"Whoever, being a person employed" is a problem. See e.g. the recent case of a federal judge denying the DOJ's attempted defense of a defamation case by a rape accuser against the Buffoon in his personal, not presidential, capacity.

#27 | Posted by et_al at 2020-11-23 02:39 AM | Reply

they're just your average everyday Republicans...

classless, deplorable, members of an utterly
corrupt political party that is more concerned
with itself, than with the country, and which
is leaning very far, towards authoritarianism...

#28 | Posted by earthmuse at 2020-11-23 06:42 AM | Reply

372. Conspiracy to impede or injure officer

"Conspiracy," a term of art, is a concern then there's the "force, intimidation, or threat" language.

What would one call the pressure campaign that Trump and his minions are trying to force state officials into following to overturn the will of voters? Public charges of corruption? Death threats? What in holy hell do you call "intimidation or threat" if not public calls for resignation for actually following state laws because it harms one and only one candidate on the ballot?

595. Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments

"Whoever, being a person employed" is a problem. See e.g. the recent case of a federal judge denying the DOJ's attempted defense of a defamation case by a rape accuser against the Buffoon in his personal, not presidential, capacity.

I posted this to represent potential federal charges against state or local election officials if proven complicit with the President's call to illegally violate federal and/or statutory law as it pertains to codifying election results.

Twinpac, I wasn't offering these additions in any attempt to negate the thrust of your points, just to show that there are even more statutes on the books that those complicit in these coup attempts apparently can be charged with - at least on first glance.

#29 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-23 07:02 AM | Reply

372.

Let me clarify.

If two or more persons in any State, Territory, Possession, or District conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office,...
Joe Biden is being denied his legally won electors - hence his right to receive legally won electoral votes and ascension to the presidency by force AND intimidation placed upon local/state officials from Donald Trump and his clown car of lawyers and sycophants.

#30 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-23 07:13 AM | Reply

I know, TONY

I was just annoyed because Et Al was driving this debate into the weeds with his hair splitting and his need for oneupmanship in what started out to be a nice conversation between myself and BOCAINK. I don't mind people joining in, like you for example, but Et Al is very much like Goatman in that he wants to turn every conversation in warfare.

I have since relegated Et al to the trash pile. It's not that I don't have time for his nonsense ~ I have lots of time. Much like Goatman, he isn't worth even a minute of it.

#31 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-23 07:23 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

TONY

"If two or more persons in any State, Territory, Possession, or District conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office,..."

"Joe Biden is being denied his legally won electors - hence his right to receive legally won electoral votes and ascension to the presidency by force AND intimidation placed upon local/state officials from Donald Trump and his clown car of lawyers and sycophants."

You described a case for conspiracy for which there are, no doubt, other legal remedies through the justice system. Or Biden can just run out the clock.

However, conspiracy to commit Sedition is a whole 'nother can of worms which was the genesis of the original conversation.

I just don't want to too far astray.

#32 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-23 07:38 AM | Reply

Or Biden can just run out the clock.

The "clock" is working against Biden, not for him. That is Trump's whole point now - to keep state elections from being certified so that legislatures can appoint Trump electors instead of those won by Biden. Trump is fighting a delaying tactic, trying to use the calendar against Biden.

I'm all for whatever charges apply regardless of the category. Since what we're speaking to right now is related to the election, I only thought that looking at statutory law in that precise area made sense. Same with conspiracy in general versus just conspiracy related to sedition.

I find Trump's machinations obviously seditious, but his overall malgovernance through conspiracy transcends sedition in my opinion. Again, the question now isn't has Trump violated the law, it's what law hasn't Trump violated?

#33 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-23 07:46 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

TONY

So far Trump is 0 for 33 in his post election litigation.

The number of states who have an election law against faithless electors is also 33.

Wooing GOP legislators in battleground states is also a lost cause.

My point is that Trump is losing BIGLY in his bid to overturn the results. The fact that he has Rudy "on the job" means he's scraping the bottom of the barrel for options.

Eventually each state will certify by their due date and Trump will be out of the litigation business ~ or at least be on a slippery slope with only Rudy Giuliani for company.

I'm aware that the time frame between now and January 20 is still fraught with unknowns. Trump is becoming more maniacal by the hour. But eventually we'll get there and we'll survive.



#34 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-23 09:01 AM | Reply

Vindictive Trump Seeks to Undermine Biden's Presidency

GOOD. Democrats have been undermining Trump for 4+ years. Now the Dems are pretending nothing happened

#35 | Posted by Maverick at 2020-11-23 11:40 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

GOOD. Democrats have been undermining Trump for 4+ years.

Appropriately responding to Trump's ill behavior isn't undermining him. It's protecting the US and its citizenry.

Even the idiot rubes who are stupid enough to support Trump against their own best interests.

#36 | Posted by jpw at 2020-11-23 11:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Democrats have been standing up for human rights, which go against anything Tr*** stands for. He's a POS and so are his followers

#37 | Posted by hamburglar at 2020-11-23 12:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The Biggest Loser.

#38 | Posted by Jaspar at 2020-11-23 08:20 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort